If you have spent more than a day or two in the upper Arkansas River area, you know about Christo and the late Jeanne-Claude’s Over The River (OTR) project to create a temporary art installation by draping sections of the Arkansas River with fabric. If all goes as planed, Christo hopes to execute their dream during two weeks during the summer of 2013.
This proposal has been one of the most polarizing issues of the decade for our community, creating an environment prone to exaggeration, and irrational thinking. Unfortunately, only a few politicians have exhibited the bravery to voice their support for either side in this controversy, even though large numbers of their constituents ask for it.
Before I go any further, I should clarify my position on the question as I’m sure it will affect the way you read my comments. I hesitate to call myself a supporter of the project as I do not actively campaign for it (although most will consider this a supportive piece) however, I do believe it to be economically beneficial for our community during and well beyond the installation. And yes, I would love to see its beauty from the ground river and air.
The really interesting thing I have been observing during the last decade or so of OTR debate is how quickly and easily a seemingly intelligent and rational persons judgment can be clouded and skewed to support their opinion. Both sides are guilty of this, unfortunately however, those opposing the project have a greater propensity for twisting reality to a point that it erodes their credibility. Perhaps they made a tactical decision to do this, knowing that they can instill fear of the project in individuals that grasp sound bites of fear and fail to educate themselves on the whole story.
I could write pages on these fear inducing statements that are propagated without basis. How any times have we heard about the pristine natural beauty of the river? Sorry to ruin it for you, but for more than a century both sides of the river have been dynamited, dozed, filled, drilled, redirected and flooded with refuse and petroleum products, leaving little trace of the rivers original course or topography. Yes, the untrained eye taking in the views at 55mph from the highway will see what appears to be pristine, but a casual trip on the river or hike along the banks will revel a much different picture. By the way Webster defines pristine as; 1 : belonging to the earliest period or state 2 : not spoiled, corrupted, or polluted (as by civilization). Sorry that’s not the Ark through Bighorn Canyon.
What about the traffic delays. We keep hearing how those that commute through the canyon will have their drives disrupted for two years, and the very vocal opposition group, Rags Over the Arkansas River (ROAR), (the name choice alone more is reminiscent of schoolyard name calling rather than the intelligent, organization concerned for the canyon and its citizens they profess to be) even makes the following statement on their website; “Inability of thousands of local residents to work or to obtain food, potable water, mail, medical and veterinary care.” Really? There will be traffic delays during the two-year installation process, but to stretch it to the implied two full years is just wrong and to spread the irrational fear of thousands not having food water or medical care is obscene. Read the artist’s plan and his commitments to CDOT (they will not even work on the road side of the river during the high traffic months of June, July and August, so much for “two years”) or better yet, use your own rational judgement — how could the installation process disrupt traffic for two years? Yes, there will be traffic delays, with one lane closures limited to 400 feet within any 10-mile section, all complying with CDOT flagging protocol. These lane closures are estimated to create 2-4 minute delays. If you plan your commute from Howard to Salida so close that a 4-minute delay is an issue, you really need to reconsider your schedule even if OTR doesn’t happen.
ROAR even tries to draw a direct parallel between the number of oil and gas wells drilled in Colorado each year with the number of anchors Christo intends to drill along the river. Wouldn’t most intelligent human beings understand there is a big difference between a massive oil drilling rig making a 5 to 36 diameter hole thousands of feet deep and small self-propelled or even hand held machines Christo proposes to use to drill anchor holes? OTR will use the same type of machines CDOT uses to secure potential rock slide ares, or create blast holes for widening roads, both of which they do routinely in Bighorn Sheep Canyon. Similar drill rigs even operate within the city of Salida to run various telephone or gas lines under roadways and sidewalks. Not exactly the picture ROAR tries to paint.
The actual two-week display (and the two weeks prior and after the display when the fabric is being hung and removed) is where majority of health, safety and commuting issues naturally exist, as thousands of extra visitors (and locals) slowly traverse the canyon, stopping often to enjoy the display. The artist has committed to providing extra emergency equipment and personnel including a helicopter (all on his own dime) to alleviate the emergency response questions. Those that commute through the area during this display time are without a doubt going to have much longer drive times with greatly reduced speeds and a great potential for stopped traffic. This is a real and important concern, but shouldn’t be considered a reason to prevent the event. It will take planing, ingenuity and flexibility by both the artist’s team and the individuals and companies that require daily movement through the area to overcome this very real issue.
A piece of the fabric could fall in the river, creating a dam that would then fail and flood areas down stream causing death and property loss! Yes, I have even heard that, no they were not trained structural engineers, hydrologists or even experienced working irrigation ditches. It would be interesting to see if man has the current technology to create such a super fabric, it certainly doesn’t exist now. (No, you can’t just scale up the ripstop tarps used in irrigation ditches. Mechanical and structural properties simply don’t work that way).
The impact on the canyon’s flora and fauna is a special concern of mine and many others. While many of us that have spent large amounts of time in the outdoors observing plants and animals can theorize how the sheep, trout or rabbit bush will respond, we must rely on trained professionals. The upcoming Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should and will be closely scrutinized by many. If you are at all concerned about the impact of OTR on the canyon’s natural environment please read the EIS yourself, and not limit your beliefs to the interpretations or sound bites of others.
So here is my plea. Before making a decision to support either side in this or any other controversy educate yourself, don’t let sensationalized headlines and sound bites cloud your common sense and education. When you are arguing for or against OTR, please respect the intelligence of those in the community and don’t inflate concerns to irrational levels, in the end it only weakens your case. It’s okay to voice disagree (it’s healthy), be civil, and always be open to compromise. You probably use these values when handling controversy within your family, why not your community?
Thank you! Well said! You expressed our thoughts to a ‘T’.
Thoughtful dialogue can contribute to our community’s health in art and other matters. A real discussion of the cultural (community and individual) issues in the broader context of our shared human enterprise on this fragile planet just might be worth the whole effort brought by Christo. Impassioned political debates fall short of that.
Thanks Steve. you did a great job of expressing a number of points. I have a feeling that you are going to receive a lot of feedback on this article. I am sure that a number of people will feel like I do, which is that you have done a good job of summarizing our thoughts on the process. I am not passionate about OTR, one way or the other. I am certainly not planning on using OTR as a litmus test for political candidates. (I have a number of other litmus tests which I will use.)
I have seen other Christo installations, and I can atest that they are very powerful and moving. I am waiting to see what the EIS says about the project, because, like you, I would not want to see the canyon damaged in irreparable ways. I hope that people take your plea to heart. Time will tell.
Bill
Steve:
Great job presenting this with on open mind to the facts. I personally have the same stand you do with this project. Almost a “whatever” at this point.
Tom
A new AT&T commercial has some footage of drape like fabric over a dam . I don’t know if it was computer generated or real , but the minute I saw it , I thought of OTR . Sure enough, there is a mention of Jean Claude & Christo at the end of the commercial .
Steve,
Nice article, but it seems to be a little light on the facts. I’ve read Christo’s plan, and the appendices, studied them you might say. Having been involved with many EIS applications, the latest one was the National Park Services 2000 page EIS for the Colorado River Management Plan. It’s going to be interesting to see how what’s laid out in the plan Christo submitted is analyzed. Here are a few facts from the plan, which kinda debunk what your article touts.
Given that the proposed construction activity takes place at the Chaffee / Fremont county line, the Rincon AHRA site, Vallie Bridge, Texas Creek and pretty much all the way to Parkdale from there, this encompasses most of the length of the highway, and the fact that drilling one anchor hole takes between 3 to 4 hours means between 26,976 (1,124 days) and 35,968 (1,498 days) hours of drilling to install the anchors alone. As the Anchor transition frames each require 2 anchors per frame, that’s 4, 10 foot deep holes for each cable
Christo says to the public that at no time will the road be closed completely, yet in the plan he submits to the BLM, it states that a majority of the anchors will be installed using a 30 ton crane truck and basket, it even details the exact holes to be drilled with said crane ( I didn’t do an exact count, and the numbers aren’t contained in the plan, but it appears to be the majority of the holes on the road side). What it doesn’t say, is that in a large amount of these crane basket drilled holes, the road is only 40 feet wide, mountain to guardrail. The Rincon, or Tunnel site as the plan calls it is a perfect example. So is Vallie Bridge.
What it also doesn’t tell you is that the crane itself is 30 feet wide when set up, and CDOT requires a 6 foot buffer zone between it and any traffic. That’s a total of 36 feet, which when erected, will leave 4 feet for a vehicle to pass. The excavator mounted rock drills have a 16 foot carraige length, add 6 feet to that, and that’s 23 feet. Certainly a impediment to traffic. While Christo touts a 400’ lane closure, the CDOT standard mandated length is 1500 feet on either side of the activity I believe..
Christo’s publicity states that all activity in the “busy summer months” will take place on the railroad side of the river. The publicity fails to tell “the rest of the story.” This publicity ignores the relevant fact that if you add up the activity days listed in the drilling and event schedules in the Plan, Christo proposes 600.7 activity days on the highway side, 493.35 activity days on the railroad side and 1227.07 activity days that are unspecified as to location. The Plan also notes that highway side lane closures will occur during the weeks prior to the exhibit – this is within the “peak summer months.”
The Plan acknowledges that lodging in Salida, Canon City, Pueblo and Colorado Springs is normally fully occupied in July and August during the viewing periods. OTR visitors will displace normal visitors and this time of year. The Plan notes that the areas likely to gain from increased demand for lodging from OTR visitors are Breckenridge, Aspen, Snowmass, Vail and Denver. There is no publicly available economic impact study available to bolster any of Christo’s claims.
There will be no local revenue gains to businesses and government tax revenues from lodging due to OTR. The areas with economic gains are the most well-off areas of the state, while the local governments are the ones that will be strained without an accompanying tax revenue boost. While admitting this effect – the Plan then neglects to net out the lodging and other expenditures that will be offset by losses due to displaced visitors, in essence taking credit for economic activity that is already occurring.
So, there are a few inconvenient facts, which are contained within Christo’s plan, which seem to dispute what you say. 80 ton Klemm rock drills aren’t small, neither is an excavator or a crane truck, all of which is what’s going to be used to drill the 10 foot deep holes for the anchors. I don’t know where you got your assertions from, likely the Christo dog and pony shows, but I urge you to read the plan Christo submitted to the BLM, and the soon to be released DEIS. You might be surprised to find that all you believe to be true, perhaps isn’t.
Steve, you are spot on about the pristine-nature of the river through this area – the main reason there are rapids in this section is because when they were building the railroad they just threw their concrete and rebar waste in the river. If there’s one thing I’ve learned about Salida and small towns in general is that there is an inherent fear of change – that’s why people have made the choice to live a tranquil picturesque setting that offers very little opportunity concerning education or wealth accumulation. That this battle plagues the Arkansas Valley right now does not surprise me in the slightest. The concerns are legitimate, but people are ridiculously good problem solvers – if there’s traffic congestion – I have faith that a solution will be found.
I have seen two of Christo and Jeanne-Claude’s works – the Wrapped Reichstag in Berlin and The Gates in New York City. Neither time had I traveled to visit these pieces of art work – but rather ran across them because I just happened to literally walk right into them. Regardless of if you like his work or not – it is huge, dynamic, and thought-provoking. I have never been sure if I really get it – but I’m glad I have been able to see it and experience it (and it is a type of artwork that you really do get to experience). I grew up in Salida and think it is one of the most beautiful places in the world but I also think it is one of the most closed minded places I’ve ever lived. I had no choice but to leave after high school as a town that size in the middle of the Rocky Mountains offers no opportunity for a smart kid further his/her education and acquire some wealth in life. It saddens me that little hint of something so profound and huge to end up in the Ark Valley’s lap isn’t found to be exciting and intoxicating. In the whole scheme of things – it is not forever, it is just for a couple of years. It will be over before you even remember that it started and quite honestly (assuming that the project goes through) for a lot of people in the valley, it will be one of the most memorable events of their lifetime. I honestly can’t wait to float under those billowing pieces of fabric that are a crazy reminder that in today’s world we don’t know where nature starts and civilization ends. Maybe what we all need is a little break from reality and honestly that is one great thing that art offers us.
As an ex-member of the Front Range BLM RAC for many years, including the early Christo days, I am very disappointed that this absurd proposal has reached the stage of an EIS. CDOT should have weighed in a long time ago to prevent this transportation nightmare from even getting serious thought.
Thirteen years ago, or near to that, a CDOT representative told our RAC that this proposal had the prospect of causing very serious traffic and safety issues for Colorado especially if held when summer vacation traffic would be heavy. (Summer traffic now, judging from the traffic on the highway by my home, is much dense than then.) So a few days ago when I picked up a CD of the EIS from the local library I went first to the CDOT transportation section to see if those earlier concerns were reflected in the EIS. They were, in spades, but buried among the small print.
For example, estimated travel time for east bound traffic between Canyon City and Salida is 55.4 minutes and west bound 54.5 minutes with this caveat; the following common conditions are not accounted for by the model, “accidents and associated response requirements, natural phenomena (landslides, rocks, rain, hail, etc. motorists driving slower than assumed speeds by fabric panels and reduced travel speed by our of state visitors who are not familiar/comfortable with the roadway geometry and terrain.) Surely all of these conditions are very likely to occur and provide serious problems every hour of every day for the citizens that live along highway 50.
Further in the CDOT section two possible delay scenarios are cited that bring some reality to what might happen during OTR. A brief, five minute delay, such as a fender bender, is predicted to create a traffic queue of about 1.2 miles that would last as long as 43 minutes. About 750 vehicles would be brought to a standstill. A 20 minute delay, pretty common stuff on hwy 50, would create a queue of nearly 3 miles, involve 600 vehicles while traffic is stopped and delay about 2,450 vehicles. BUT the delays predicted by the 5 and 20 minute scenarios both assume that traffic is released in both directions at the same time. If traffic must be alternated in a one-way direction (happens most of the time) all bets are off. The delays would be significantly larger, the queues much longer creating dangerous and costly delays for the people in the queues as well as the natives along the highway. All this for a period of 2 weeks during the heaviest traffic season of the year. Bad news.
There are no predictions on what the delay would be from a serious accident or how many small ones might occur each day because of the traffic volume (upwards of 10,000 vehicles per day) or the plentitude of angry drivers sitting unmoving in their cars.
. None of the interim plans in the EIS really speak to avoiding or dealing with this monumental traffic mess.
Also included in this section of the EIS are projections for traffic delays in Canyon City and Salida. Salida fares better but at many places in Canyon City it will be a long extended nightmare and BLM will rightly inherit the blame.
Next, there is the very deceptive, short and down played mention that interstate and intrastate traffic could be diverted. As I recall the CDOT person, can’t remember the name, at our RAC meeting said that arteries that fed hwy 50 might have to be closed to vacation and commercial traffic that intended to use 50 going east. That included Tennessee Pass, Fremont Pass, hwy 50 from Grand Junction and 285/17 from Alamosa. This major impact on southeast Colorado would create havoc to normal traffic to say nothing of the angry business interests that would be affected.
OTR should never have reached this stage where people are diverted with minor issues such as scenic beauty and making money from tourists when blocking a major artery in Colorado during tourist season and depriving 5,000 residents of normal commerce, making a living plus compromising their health and safety is the overriding concern.
–
Great article Steve, I have always considered Salida an Art Community and an Outdoor community, and I look forward to seeing the two brought together.
Do you know where you’ve repeatedly heard about the pristine beauty of the river? From OTR supporters like Ed Quillen who constantly accuse the opposition of calling the canyon pristine. The opposition is fully aware of the assaults on the Upper Arkansas River, but they also know of the decades of effort that have improved water quality and developed multi-agency management plans to protect vegetation, wildlife and aquatic resources.
The BLM values the wild and scenic qualities of a large chunk of the canyon sufficiently to give it ACEC status (Area of Critical Environmental Concern). This designation isn’t slapped on an area It happens after years of study and a great deal of input from the public and various land use and resource management professionals.
The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission designated a large portion of the canyon off limits to surface occupancy, primarily out of concern for impacts to sheep. Are they know nothings? Why is mineral exploration and extraction banned from these areas but drilling with similar or the same equipment fine and dandy if done in the name of art? A large area just south of the river is proposed for wilderness designation, and an adjacent school section has been given special management designation as well because of its natural values.
As for the economic benefit, there have been no serious studies presented. Just speculation. And little has been done to evaluate the negative impacts this 3-yr project will have on many businesses, beginning but not ending with the sport fishing business. Those who will be hurt are apparently collateral damage. One letter writer to another publication summed up the position of many supporters: “No curtains, no money for us.” Real community spirit, there.